MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4225249822 · doi:10.1097/ju.0000000000002608.02

MP42-02 URINARY HUMAN PAPILLOMA VIRUS INFECTION AND BLADDER CANCER RISK: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND A PRISMA-COMPLIANT META-ANALYSIS

2022· review· en· W4225249822 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. García-Rojo, Jesús Muñoz-Rodríguez, Clara Centeno, Á. Prera, Carlos Arroyo Abad, Eduardo Vicente, J.L. Gonzalez-Sala, N. Hannaoui, Arturo Dominguez-Garcia, Marta Capdevila, Leticia de Verdonces, Anna Pujol Ferran, Carmina Pla, Paula Azuara, Silvia Cuadrench, Maria Eugenia Zegri, Juan Prats

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Journal of Urology · 2022
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGarciaMedicineHuman papilloma virusMeta-analysisCancerHumanitiesArtPathologyInternal medicineCervical cancer

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022MP42-02 URINARY HUMAN PAPILLOMA VIRUS INFECTION AND BLADDER CANCER RISK: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND A PRISMA-COMPLIANT META-ANALYSIS Dario Garcia-Rojo, Jesus Muñoz-Rodriguez, Clara Centeno, Angel Prera, Carlos Abad, Eduardo Vicente, Jose Luis Gonzalez-Sala, Naim Hannaoui, Arturo Dominguez-Garcia, Marta Capdevila, Leticia de Verdonces, Anna Ferran, Carmina Pla, Paula Azuara, Silvia Cuadrench, Maria Eugenia Zegri, and Juan Prats Dario Garcia-RojoDario Garcia-Rojo More articles by this author , Jesus Muñoz-RodriguezJesus Muñoz-Rodriguez More articles by this author , Clara CentenoClara Centeno More articles by this author , Angel PreraAngel Prera More articles by this author , Carlos AbadCarlos Abad More articles by this author , Eduardo VicenteEduardo Vicente More articles by this author , Jose Luis Gonzalez-SalaJose Luis Gonzalez-Sala More articles by this author , Naim HannaouiNaim Hannaoui More articles by this author , Arturo Dominguez-GarciaArturo Dominguez-Garcia More articles by this author , Marta CapdevilaMarta Capdevila More articles by this author , Leticia de VerdoncesLeticia de Verdonces More articles by this author , Anna FerranAnna Ferran More articles by this author , Carmina PlaCarmina Pla More articles by this author , Paula AzuaraPaula Azuara More articles by this author , Silvia CuadrenchSilvia Cuadrench More articles by this author , Maria Eugenia ZegriMaria Eugenia Zegri More articles by this author , and Juan PratsJuan Prats More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002608.02AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Association between human papilloma virus (HPV) infection and risk of bladder cancer (BlCa) remain inconclusive. We carried out a systematic review and a PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of the available case-control studies in order to verify possible differences in the occurrence of HPV infection in urine samples in patients with BlCa and normal subjects. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature and a PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis was performed using the PICO method with the aim of answering the following clinical question: "Is urinary infection with HPV a risk factor for the development of a BlCa?". PubMed was used to search for articles published from January 1965 to October 2021 using the key words "bladder cancer" and "human papilloma virus". Case-control studies reporting Odds Ratio (OR) for HPV infection in urine samples in patients with BlCa and and normal subjects were analyzed. The quality of the studies was evaluated by the New Castle Ottawa scale. Data were combined using random effect models. The Cochrane χ2 (Cochrane Q) statistic and the I2 test were used to analyze heterogeneity. The publication bias was graphically explored through funnel plot, and Duval and Tweedie ′s ″trim-and-fill″ test was used to correct possible publication bias. RESULTS: Among 251 articles, 35 were selected to be fully read. The selection process yielded four case-control studies with eligibly criteria for analysis, that gave information on 150 patients with HPV infection in urine and 1259 patients without HPV infection in urine. The quality scores according to the New Castle-Ottawa scale of all included studies were 9, suggesting that all included studies were eligible for synthesized analysis. The pooled OR estimated showed that patients with HPV infection in urine exhibit a significantly higher prevalence in BlCa than patients without HPV infection (OR = 2.94, 95%CI: 1.805, 4.788; p= 0.002). We obtained a heterogeneity χ2value Q exp=2.317 (p=0.509) (I2 = 0%). Funnel plot not suggested a possible publication bias in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled OR value showed a moderate relationship between urinary HPV infection and BlCa risk. HPV infection in the urine may have a role in carcinogenesis of the bladder tumor. Source of Funding: none © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e730 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Dario Garcia-Rojo More articles by this author Jesus Muñoz-Rodriguez More articles by this author Clara Centeno More articles by this author Angel Prera More articles by this author Carlos Abad More articles by this author Eduardo Vicente More articles by this author Jose Luis Gonzalez-Sala More articles by this author Naim Hannaoui More articles by this author Arturo Dominguez-Garcia More articles by this author Marta Capdevila More articles by this author Leticia de Verdonces More articles by this author Anna Ferran More articles by this author Carmina Pla More articles by this author Paula Azuara More articles by this author Silvia Cuadrench More articles by this author Maria Eugenia Zegri More articles by this author Juan Prats More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,049
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,171
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Méta-analyse · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,049
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,259

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0490,171
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0150,037
Bibliométrie0,0040,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0050,004
Science ouverte0,0040,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0050,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0210,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,111
Tête enseignante GPT0,386
Écart entre enseignants0,274 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeMéta-analyse
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Journal of UrologyMême sujetBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207